Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 14 Jan 2002 07:06:31 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 14 Jan 2002 07:06:22 -0500 Received: from garrincha.netbank.com.br ([200.203.199.88]:38927 "HELO netbank.com.br") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Mon, 14 Jan 2002 07:06:11 -0500 Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 10:05:26 -0200 (BRST) From: Rik van Riel X-X-Sender: To: "David S. Miller" Cc: , , Subject: Re: Linux 2.4.18pre3-ac1 In-Reply-To: <20020114.012831.44983761.davem@redhat.com> Message-ID: X-spambait: aardvark@kernelnewbies.org X-spammeplease: aardvark@nl.linux.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 14 Jan 2002, David S. Miller wrote: > From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) > > But for make -j the forking is done by make and it is nearly a > fork bomb > > Someone has probably mentioned this, but it is important to recognize > that make uses vfork(). Indeed. In the beginning I was also afraid I'd hit the fork() problem Eric mentions, but after running lots of tests I can't really say it has shown up in the profiles anywhere. I'm sure you could make a benchmark to clearly show it, but for most common workloads it doesn't seem to be much of an issue. A possible exception to this is apache, I need to look into that a bit more. regards, Rik -- "Linux holds advantages over the single-vendor commercial OS" -- Microsoft's "Competing with Linux" document http://www.surriel.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/